Disciplinary Case Summaries, 0617 COBJ, Vol. 46 No. 6 Pg. 91
| Author | Cobar Host, J. |
Office of the Presiding Disciplinary Judge
Cobar Host, J.
Disciplinary Case Summaries
The summaries of disciplinary case Opinions and Conditional Admissions of Misconduct are prepared by the Office of the Presiding Disciplinary Judge (PDJ) and are provided as a service by the CBA. The CBA cannot guarantee the accuracy or completeness of the summaries. Opinions, including exhibits, complaints, amended complaints, and summaries, are available at the PDJ website, www.coloradosupremecourt.com/PDJ/PDJ_Decisions.asp, and on LexisNexis.® The summaries and full-text Opinions are also accessible from the CBA website: www.cobar.org (click on “For Members,” and then “Opinions/Rules/Statutes”).
No. 17PDJ019. People v. Olsen. 4/3/2017.
The PDJ approved the parties’ conditional admission of misconduct in this reciprocal discipline matter and publicly censured Daniel E. Olsen, attorney registration number 20934, effective April 3, 2017.
On April 13, 2016, the Supreme Court of Wisconsin publicly reprimanded Olsen based on two separate matters. In the first, Olsen pleaded no contest to two counts of reckless driving, an unclassified misdemeanor. Those convictions stemmed from an automobile accident in which Olsen—while driving with a suspended driver’s license—made a left turn into an oncoming vehicle. Olsen then failed to timely report his convictions to Wisconsin disciplinary authorities, as he was required to do.
In the second matter, Olsen practiced law while his law license was administratively suspended for failure to comply with Wisconsin CLE requirements.
Olsen’s misconduct constitutes grounds for reciprocal discipline under CRCP 251.5 and 251.21, which calls for imposition of the same discipline as that imposed in Wisconsin.
No. 16PDJ052. People v. Sarpong. 2/14/2017.
Following a sanctions hearing, the PDJ disbarred James Spencer Sarpong, attorney registration number 38669, from the practice of law. Sarpong’s disbarment took effect on March 21, 2017.
Sarpong failed to communicate with three immigration clients and failed to exercise diligence in advancing their matters. Over time, this neglect amounted to abandonment of these vulnerable clients. In one matter, he also retained unearned fees. And later, he disregarded requests for information from disciplinary authorities.
Through this misconduct, Sarpong...
To continue reading
Request your trial